Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences 2011 Cenresin Publications www.cenresinpub.

org

Volume 3, December 2011

DESIGN OF A PROCESS LAYOUT FOR PALM OIL PRODUCTION PLANT

* Imoukhuede, K.A., **Ologunagba, F.O. and *Tanimola, B.A. *Department of Mechanical Engineering, Rufus Giwa Polytechnic Owo Ondo State. **Department of Agricultural Engineering, Rufus Giwa Polytechnic Owo Ondo State. E-mail: bidek2@yahoo.com, francolog2@yahoo.com, tundetanimola@yahoo.co.uk

ABSTRACT Process layout optimisation is one of the key areas industrial engineers need to take care of in the production plant. This paper points up how a process layout design is used to apply the principle of work place design, workspace design and the use of computer program to optimally arrange production facilities in a manner that fits job to man so as to create conditions in work environment that furnishes operators comfort and stress reduction for a palm oil production plant and its end products manufacturing system. The approach involves identifying and solving plant layout problems, thereby generating an ideal layout that can enhance efficient implementation of a production process. This paper also brings out practical decisions required for achieving optimality in the design process.

Keywords: Design, Process Layout, Palm Oil, Production Plant, Computer Program, Workspace
INTRODUCTION Manufacturing has always been the key to success among nations in the world economy. A responsive manufacturing system working in harmony with the rest of an enterprise has a major impact on its competitiveness; it plays a vital role in the successful introduction of new products or continuous improvements of existing products in response to demands of the market. According to Sharma (2006), manufacturing consists of a series of interrelated activities and operations involving design, material selection and quality assurance. Ogunkoya (2007), defined small industrial units as industries with limited scale manufacturing operations that do only selectively, demonstrated the typical impact of scale on productivity and output. Exploitation of oil palm is well suited to small technologies. Thus small-scale farmers dominate the oil palm industry in West African countries. In Nigeria over 70% of the annual production of palm oil are produced by small-scale processors (Ataga et al, 1983). The World Bank has been laying emphasis on the establishment of small-scale enterprises as vehicle for economic growth and development in Africa. These small enterprises often lack funds to establish and operate large plants. They also experience the technical problem of getting machines, preferably technical partners overseas. These problems therefore resolve into the development of the capacity design and implement small machines, equipment for a palm oil industry. This enables us to have a decision problem bordering on domestic engineering initiative and it is instructive to design a process layout that can enhance efficient implementation of a production system. Normally, a production system must be flexible enough to permit future changes brought about by production technology or changes in product design. In todays volatile and competitive environment, manufacturing facilities must be designed with enough flexibility to withstand significant changes in their operating requirements. The shortening of 26

Design of a Process Layout for Palm Oil Production Plant

Imoukhuede, K.A., Ologunagba, F.O. and Tanimola, B.A.

product life cycles and increased variety in product offerings require that facilities remain useful over many product generations and support the manufacturing of a large number of products. In the design of the process layout of a palm oil production plant, the process layout apply the principle of work place design and work space design to optimally arrange production facilities in a manner that fits the job to man so as to create conditions in work environment that furnishes operators comfort and stress reduction. Process layout design is a process that deals with the arrangement of machine or production facilities in their correct relative position in the available workspace to create conditions in work environment that furnishes operators comfort and stress reduction. Process layouts are found primarily in job shops or firms that produce customized, small quantity products that may require different processing requirements and sequences of operations; process layouts are facility configurations in which operations of similar nature or function are grouped together. Different literature on the design of a process layout has been on articles on various approaches for large and small scale industries. For instance Riis (1992) as well as Gouzhn and Riis (2001) proposed methods for modern plant layout that can furnish optimum production. He emphasized that plant layout design should be viewed in the context of the whole production system. Moore (1978) proposed computer aided plant layout design and pointed out several limitations associated with computer aided layout design and made suggestions on how to improve its use. Ostresh (1975), Love and Moris (1975), Love and Juel (1982), Christofides and Viola (1971) all discussed the application algorithms to the optimization of the process layout design. Francis and White (1974) advocated an integrated approach to multi-criteria facility layout problem. It is worthy to note that, most of the works cited above have only theoretical value and perhaps their practicality has not been demonstrated. METHODOLOGY This study involves visiting a palm oil production plant to understand the existing layout and assess the trip frequency between adjacent and non-adjacent departments; various processes were also studied to understand the ergonomic implications to human capabilities and limitations. The areas of investigation includes degree of closeness, relationship that exists between departments and flow that exists between departments, area required for each work centres and some other layout planning requirements such as transportation time, material volume, number of movement and so on. The tool used in carrying out this investigation includes subjects interrogation using the questionnaire and also by direct measurement of plants dimensions in terms of areas and distances between departments. Table 1.0 shows the relationship priority code. The shortcomings and closeness relationship problems identified were eliminated.The departments contain in the layout include 1) Administrative Department: This consist of i) Directors Office, ii) General Managers office, iii) Secretarys office iv) Personnel Managers office, v) General Administrative office, vi) Account office and vii) Production Managers office. 2) Electrical Department: This consists of i) Workshop, ii) Electrical Engineers office and iii) Power Generating section. 3) Maintenance Department: This consists of i) Engineering Workshop, ii) Workshop Engineers office and iii) Engineering Store. 27

Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences

Volume 3, December 2011

4) Marketing Department: This consists of i) Marketing office, ii) Loading section, iii) Weigh bridge/ Computer section. 5) Research and Quality Control Department: This consists of i) Laboratory and ii) Chemical Store. 6) Production Department Mathematical Analysis The objective function is to minimize the effective distance or travel between departments that have strong activity relationships with each other

Where for all set of i relationship with j Notation i = Department on the column (i = 1,2,3,....n) j = Department on the row (j = 1,2,3,...m) k = Location of department i h = Location of department j = Rectilinear distance between the centres of the kth and hth locations for departments i and j (length of the shortest path or the least number of square blocks between two departments as represented in the grid). Gij = Numerical activity relationship rating of the department i and j. F = Layout effectiveness value (effective) distance relationship between departments. Solution Procedure Stage 1 Compose the relationship priority codes for -1 Gij 4 (Table 1.0) Table 1. Relationship Priority Codes Code Priority A Absolute necessary E Especially important I Important O Ordinary U Unimportant X Undesirable Table 2. Reasons for relationship Priority Codes Code Reason 1 Same dock 2 Flow of Material 3 Service 4 Convenience 5 Inventory Control 6 Communication 28

Value 4 3 2 1 0 -1

Design of a Process Layout for Palm Oil Production Plant

Imoukhuede, K.A., Ologunagba, F.O. and Tanimola, B.A.

7 8 9 10

Same personnel Cleanliness Chemical Reaction Production Flow

Stage 2 Construct the closeness relationship value (activity relationship table) using Tj1 = Gi1j2 + Gi1j3 + Gi1j4 + Gi1j5 + . . . . .Gi1jm Tj2 = Gi1j2 + Gi2j3 + Gi2j4 + Gi2j5 + . . . . .Gi2jm Tj3 = Gi1j3 + Gi2j3 + Gi3j4 + Gi3j5 + . . . . .Gi3jm Tj4 = Gi1j4 + Gi2j4 + Gi3j4 + Gi4j5 + . . . . .Gi4jm Tj5 = Gi1j5 + Gi2j5 + Gi3j5 + Gi4j5 + Gi5j6 + . . . . .Gi4jm Tjm = Gi1jm+ Gi2jm + Gi3jm+ Gi4jm + Gi5jm + . . . . .Gin-1jm-1 Where, Tj = Total closeness relationship value for each department (section). The results of stage2 are shown in table 3.1, 4.1 and 5.1 respectively. The Tj is used to generate the nodal diagram. Stage 3 Generate square blocks for grid formation of each department is converted to an approximate number of square blocks using Where, B is the number of blocks to be generated for each department (section). A is the area of the department (section) in square meters. q is the block dimension. For the purpose of this research q = 2, 6 for office section and production section with the whole plant layout generation respectively. Stage 4 Now construct the grid. The grid is made up of square blocks generated from each department. Rectangular shaped grids are used for the purpose of this research. Bt = Bi Bj Where Bt = Total number of square blocks in the grid Bi = Total number of square blocks on the grid column (length). Bj = Total number of square blocks on the grid row (width). Bt = 13 14, 124, 164 office section, production section and the whole plant layout generation respectively. Stage 5 Determine the layout effectiveness value (the effective distance or travel between department) for the grid arrangement. The nodal diagram and on the grid arrangement are varied until the minimum workable effectiveness value (minimum effective distance relationship) is obtained.

29

Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences

Volume 3, December 2011

Where Fj = distance effectiveness row value Therefore

F = Fj1 + F j2 + Fj3 + Fj4 + . . . . . + Fjm-1. Where Fj1 = Gi1j2d(ki1,hj2) + Gi1j3d(ki1,hj3) + Gi1j4d(ki1,hj4) + . . . . .+ Gi1jmd(ki1,hjm). Fj2 = Gi2j3d(ki2,hj3) + Gi2j4d(ki2,hj4) + Gi2j5d(ki2,hj5) + . . . . .+ Gi2jmd(ki2,hjm) Fj3 = Gi3j4d(ki3,hj4) + Gi3j5d(ki3,hj5) + Gi3j6(ki3,hj6) + . . . . . . .+ Gi3jmd(ki3,hjm) Fj4 = Gi4j5d(ki4,hj5) + Gi4j6d(ki4, hj6) + Gi4j7(ki4,hj7) + . . . . . . + Gi4jmd(ki4,hjm) Fj5 = Gi5j6d(ki5,hj6) + Gi5j7d(ki5,hj7) + Gi5j8(ki5,hj8) + . . . . . . + Gi5jmd(ki5,hjm) Fjm-1 = Gin-1jmd(kin-1,hjm) The grid with the minimum workable effectiveness value (minimum effective distance relationship is chosen. These stages 1 to 5 are observable in generating office segment, production segment and the whole plant. Table 3. Office Space Measurements
S/N 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. SECTION Director Secretary General Manager Personal Manager Marketing Manager Production Manager Account General Administration Console Toilet and Bathroom Total AREA (SQUARE METRES) 23.04 23.04 28.80 17.64 28.80 17.64 23.04 17.64 23.04 8.64 211.32 NO OF BLOCK (B) q=2 6 6 7 4 7 4 6 4 6 2 52

Table 3.1 Closeness Relationship Value for Office Space Measurements

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 4 3 4 4 4 2 0 4 5 2 0 4 2 6 2 0 4 2 0 7 1 0 1 2 3 3 8 0 0 0 2 2 2 1 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 TOTAL 17 10 23 16 15 15 13 9 2 18

30

Design of a Process Layout for Palm Oil Production Plant

Imoukhuede, K.A., Ologunagba, F.O. and Tanimola, B.A.

Table 3.2 Effectiveness Value for Office Layout for the Production Section
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Total Value F 1 2 40 3 40 40 4 26 00 41 5 20 01 40 24 6 26 01 40 20 03 7 16 01 10 21 31 30 8 05 02 05 22 20 21 10 9 01 24 01 06 00 05 03 00 10 29 24 23 22 24 21 20 20 24 ROW VALUE 48 8 10 18 11 4 0 0 8 0 107

Table 3.3 Grid Formation for the Office Layout

4 4 4 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 6 6 6 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 7 7 7 7 7 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 7 10 10 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9

6 7

2 3

10

9
8

31

Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences

Volume 3, December 2011

Fig.1. Nodal Diagram for the Office Layout Table 4. Space Measurements for Production Section S/N PRODUCTION SECTION AREA (SQUARE METRES) NO OF BLOCK S (B), (q=6.) 1. Sterilisation 72.00 2 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Threshing and Stripping Oil Extraction Clarification and Purification Depericating Nut Craking Winnowing and Drying Effluent Treatment Plant and Press Cake Total 330.48 330.48 181.44 138.24 116.64 51.84 540.00 1761.12 9 9 5 4 3 1 15 48

Table 4.1 Closeness Relationship Value for the Production Section 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Table 4.2 Effectiveness Values for Production Section Layout 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 43 40 40 40 00 00 00 2 11 40 00 00 00 00 3 40 00 00 00 00 4 00 40 00 41 5 45 24 00 6 40 00 7 11 8 TOTAL VALUE F 32 4 4 1 4 4 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 0 2 4 0 1 0 4 0 0 1 -

TOTAL 16 9 9 20 10 12 7 5

ROW VALUE 12 1 0 8 28 0 1 0 50

Design of a Process Layout for Palm Oil Production Plant

Imoukhuede, K.A., Ologunagba, F.O. and Tanimola, B.A.

Table 4.3 Grid Formation for Production 5 1 3 5 1 3 5 4 3 5 4 3 2 4 3 2 4 3 2 4 3 2 7 3 2 6 8 2 6 8 2 6 8 2 2 8

Section Layout 3 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8

Fig. 2. Nodal Diagram for the Production Section Layout Table 5.0 Space Measurement for the Whole Plant. S/N WHOLE PLANT AREA (SQUARE METERS) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Production Material Store Laboratory Office Mech-w/s & Store Electrical Dept Power Generating Section Food Services 1761.12 52.92 28.80 211.32 64.80 64.80 34.56 34.56 2252.88 33

NO OF BLOCK S B (q=6.) 49 2 1 6 2 2 1 1 64

Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences

Volume 3, December 2011

Table 5.1 Closeness Relationship Value 1 2 3 1 4 3 2 4 3 4 5 6 7 8 Table 5.2 1 2 40 -

for the Whole Plant. 4 5 6 3 4 3 0 2 2 1 0 0 1 1 2 -

7 3 0 0 0 1 3 -

8 4 1 1 1 0 0 0 -

TOTAL 24 13 9 7 10 11 7 7

Effectiveness Value for the Whole Plant 3 4 5 6 7 8 ROW VALUE 1 30 30 40 30 30 41 4 2 40 01 20 22 03 12 6 3 10 02 04 03 12 2 4 11 11 00 10 2 5 20 12 03 2 6 34 05 12 7 00 0 8 0 TOTAL VALUE F 28 Table 5.3 Grid Formation for the Whole plant 3 4 4 1 4 8 1 4 7 1 4 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 5 5 6 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

34

Design of a Process Layout for Palm Oil Production Plant

Imoukhuede, K.A., Ologunagba, F.O. and Tanimola, B.A.

Fig.3. Nodal Diagram for the Whole Plant

STERILISATION 72.00m2

THRESHING AND STRIPPING 330.48m2

OIL EXTRACTION 330.48m2

CLARIFICATION AND PURIFICATION 181.44m2

DEPERICATING 138.24m2

NUT CRAKING 116.64m2

WINNOWING AND DRYING 51.84m2

EFFLUENT TREATMENT PLANT AND PRESS LAKE 540.00m2

Fig 4. Block Diagram for the Factory Plan for Palm Oil Production DISCUSSION In the course of the analysis we spotlighted several techniques for placement of machines and other equipment of production system in order to promote flow of people and 35

Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences

Volume 3, December 2011

material. The overall procedure entails assigning space within the production plant and arranging equipments within their assigned space. In particular we saw that the final layout developed in figures 1, 2, 3 and 4 are demonstrative even without demonstration in the sense that the charts used employed logic and visual representation of information in a clearer and codified manner. The final layout will effectively allow people to use machines to process materials. It requires minimum movement of people and machines it provides for the sequential flow of materials as they move through processing steps; it gives workers a safe work environment. Finally it is flexible and easily changed. In finality the analysis in the study has helped to clarify thinking about the application of personcentred considerations in the design of the facility layout. Perhaps the most significant lessons to be learned from this study is that the most common approach in developing a process layout is to arrange workstations consisting of like processes in a way that optimizes their relative placement. And by optimal placement, it is meant placing workstations with amount of inter-station traffic adjacent to one another. CONCLUSION The authors have shown the usefulness of integrating the heuristic concept into process layout decision problems as a means of optimizing workflow, movement of people and production rate. The results of this study support the current method of front ending production planning, which requires optimal production quantities even at the initial stages of production phase. REFERNCES Apple, J.M. and Deisenrotch, M.P. (1992): A Computerization Model for Plant Layout Analysis and Evaluation Technique (PLANET). Alle Technical Papers of 23rd Conference Anaheim, California. Ataga,D.O., Ilechie, C.O.and Omoti, U. 1993. Small-Scale Palm Oil Processing Technology in Nigeria. Nigerian Institute for Oil Palm Research (NIFOR). Benin-City. Buffa,E.S., Armour, G.C. and Vollman, T.E. (1966): Allocating Facilities with CRAFT, Harvard Business Review, Vol., 42(2);136 Christofides, N. And Viola, P. (1971): The Optimum Location of Multi Centres on a Graph. Operation Research Quarterly; Vol., 22, No2. Dutta, K.N. and Sahu, S. (1982): A Multi-goal Heuristic for Facilities Design Problems. MIJGHAL, International Journal of Production Research 20(2), 147-154. Edwards, H.K., Gilbert, B.E. and Hale, M.E. (1970): Modular Allocation Technique (MAT). Management Science Vol., 17 (1); 161-167. Francis, R.L. and White, J. A. (1974): Facilities Layout and Location; An Analytical Approach Eaglewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall. 36

Design of a Process Layout for Palm Oil Production Plant

Imoukhuede, K.A., Ologunagba, F.O. and Tanimola, B.A.

Gouzhu, Jia and Riss, O. Jens (2001): Development of the Integrated Design Process to Plant Layout and Its Application in a Medium Enterprises, New York: Addison. Igboanugo A.C. and Amiebenomo, S.O. (2006): Design of a Process Layout for Pilot Alkyd Resin Production Plant. International Conference on Engineering Research and Development. Love, R.F. and Juel, H. (1982): Properties and Solution Methods for Large Location Allocation Problem. Journal of the Operational Research Society Vol., 33, No 5,pp 443452. Love, R.F. and Morris, J.G. (1975): A Computational Procedure for the Exact Solution of Location-Allocation Problems with Rectangular Distances. National Research Logistics Quarterly Vol.22, No 3, pp 441-453. Moore, J.M. (1974): Computer Aided Facilities Design an International Survey. International Journal of Production Research Vol.12 (1) 21-44. Ogunkoya, A. K.2002. Process Re-Engineering of a Small-Scale Industry for Competitive Production. Unpublished M.Eng. Seminar in the Department of Mechanical engineering, Federal University of Technology, Akure. Ostresh, L.M. (1975): An Efficient Algorithm for Solving the Two Centre Location. Journal of Regional Science, Vol. 15, No 2 pp 209- 276. Riis, J. (1992): Integration and Manufacturing Strategy. Computers in Industry, pp 3750. Rosenblatt, M.J. (1979): The Facilities Layout Problem-A Multi-goal International Journal of Production Research. Vol. 17 (4) 323-332. Approach,

Sharma, P.C. (2006): Production Engineering Textbook, S. Chand and Company Ltd, India.

37